[CCWG-ACCT] WP2 Issues from last night's call

Eric Brunner-Williams ebw at abenaki.wabanaki.net
Tue Nov 3 19:28:20 UTC 2015


It has been suggested to me off-list that "at the top level,
co-ordination of the root name server system is one of ICANN's
functions, as the text makes quite clear" and that "the regulation of
local resolvers is a local matter".

If we look back at the SSAC, mid-year, 2008, following on its prior work
on the same subject in 2004, and 2006, there are a significant number of
"advisories", and in this period Steve Crocker (Shinkuro) chaired the
SSAC -- all on the issue of when a resolver functions incorrectly.

Which fantasy are we to entertain? That Steve et al thought they were
advising local authorities when writing SAC 013, SAC 15, and SAC 32,
because local authorities hang, breathless in anticipation, on the notes
produced by some ICANN advisory committee, or that Patrick et al -- the
current SSAC leadership and members -- now think, and will continue to
think, that as they go about writing Board-advisory notes, that the
correct function of resolvers is something to which the Board is
necessarily indifferent.

I suggest that Steve et al thought, and Patrick et al think, that when
they advise the Board, it is on a subject matter the Board can, and in
the informed view of the SSAC, should act upon.

Or shall we tell the SSAC, the RSSAC, and others, that we are
indifferent to anything but contract, for that is the complete scope of
ICANN's mission.

Eric









More information about the Accountability-Cross-Community mailing list